Re: I/O cache batteries - warning state

[bryan dietz <bdietz400@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dave Not sure why and it may be worth a call to your CE.
I did notice that IBM released  some PTF's to make the collection of battery
cache info easier to get.

    PTF       Release    Abstract
    SI40406      7.1      OSP-OTHER Battery cache information
    SI40404      6.1      OSP-OTHER Battery cache information
    SI40403      5.4      OSP-OTHER Battery cache information

<coverletter>
Provide the battery cache information via a simpler method.
To display the battery cache information run the following:
CALL QSYS/QSMBTTCC
This will display a spool file containing the battery cache
information for the IBM i partition where the function is run.
To use this function you must have *SERVICE special authority,
or be authorized to the Service Trace function. The Change
Function Usage (CHGFCNUSG) command, with a function ID of
QIBM_SERVICE_TRACE, can also be used to change the list of users
that are allowed to perform this operation.
</coverletter>

Bryan



On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 8:47 AM, Dave Snyder <DSnyder@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I have been monitoring my cache batteries and for one of our systems, it
> appears they should be reporting in a warning status but are not. See
> below - days to warning are zero (and have been for a couple of days) but
> warning status is not on.
>
>                               Battery Information
>
> Resource name . . . . . . . . . . . :   DC02
> Serial number . . . . . . . . . . . :
> Actual type-model . . . . . . . . . :   573D-001
> Unit ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :   U787F.001.DPM4G6F
> Planar ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . :   P1
> Card  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :   C8
> Battery type  . . . . . . . . . . . :   Nickel Metal Hydride (NiMH)
> Battery state . . . . . . . . . . . :   No battery warning/error
> Power-on time (days)  . . . . . . . :   907
> Adjusted power-on time (days) . . . :   1003
> Estimated time to warning (days)  . :   0
> Estimated time to error (days)  . . :   75
> Concurrently maintainable           :
>  battery pack . . . . . . . . . . .:   No
> Battery pack can be safely replaced :   No
>
> Anyone else seen this before or have any ideas why it did not create a
> warning status? We are on v5r4 with latest PTFs. I will be putting a call
> into IBM to get them replaced, just wondering why they did not "report
> in".
>
> Dave